Attention America! Liberals want their Media back!

It can be returned to the National Lost & Found c/o a Democrat-controlled Congress.

I know I sound like a fear-mongering conservative, but you’ll just have to forgive me. All too often it seems that Republicans are being referred to as the ones that support a “1984” infrastructure where the government is wire-tapping every phone and “Big Brother” is always watching. But could it be that their opponents, the Democrats, are also guilty of advocating similar measures?

I’ll start off by saying that in some ways, I favor censorship. There are just some things that don’t need to be in the mainstream media. I’m talking about foul and explicit language, nudity, extremely graphic violence, etc. You may or may not disagree with that. It doesn’t matter to me. I just wanted to get that out of the way.

Rumors have been flying recently that liberals are interested in dismantling conservative talk radio and even Fox News. That all sounded like hearsay and conjecture to me until I found out some startling information:

DNC Chairman Howard Dean has recently been quoted as saying that “we need to re-regulate the media.” What an interesting idea you have there, Howard. I wonder how you’d plan to do it.

It sounds so great, doesn’t it? Fairness. That means it’s fair, right? The idea behind it is that all forms of news media will be regulated to allow equal time for opposing points of view. In theory, that’s not necessarily a bad plan. But which side do you think has more capability of presenting their side of the story? My guess would be the liberal side.

Let’s shed a little more light on the subject. Take a look at how President Kennedy’s Assistant Secretary of Commerce Bill Ruder viewed the Fairness Doctrine: “Our massive strategy was to use the Fairness Doctrine to challenge and harass right-wing broadcasters and hope the challenges would be so costly to them that they would be inhibited and decide it was too expensive to continue.” Keep in mind, Ruder was operating with a Democratic President, a Democratic-controlled Congress, and a progressive Supreme Court.

Could that happen again? Surely not! But let’s look at what other Democrats are saying:

When questioned about a revival of the Fairness Doctrine, Dianne Feinstein said “Well, I’m looking at it…because I think there ought to be an opportunity to present the other side. And unfortunately, talk radio is overwhelmingly one way.”

John Kerry recently said, “I think the Fairness Doctrine ought to be there… conservatives got rid of the equal time requirements and the result is that they have been able to squeeze down and squeeze out opinion of opposing views and I think its been a very important transition in the imbalance of our public eye.”

Liberal members of Congress such as Dennis Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, Maurice Hinchey, Louise Slaughter, and Dick Durbin have also voiced support for a return to the Fairness Doctrine.

But in case the Fairness Doctrine falls through, you can always take the same route that MoveOn.Org and the DailyKos are taking: tell everyone to boycott conservative media. They’ve already been successful in urging Democratic candidates not to debate on Fox News channel. However, they have failed thus far in discouraging Home Depot from advertising on Fox.

Of course, they could always be honest and try starting a liberal network of their own. Wait a second. Didn’t that already happen? Oh yes, AirAmerica. How is that doing nowadays? Didn’t it go bankrupt?

Americans will get their news from where they choose to. Some choose not to use television, and that’s fine. Some prefer the internet above all. That doesn’t bother me either. I personally choose to get my news from different sources including television, the internet, and sometimes even radio. Frankly, I typically go to Fox News first when it comes to television. But I won’t refuse to look at other sources like CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, or wherever. When I want news from the internet, I might just type something in a search engine like Yahoo or Google (whatever I’m in the mood for).

Regulation of mainstream media through the Fairness Doctrine or any method that denies Americans the right to choose their source of media is completely anti-capitalist. It’s just one more way that liberals across America can rear their socialistic heads.

It’s tough to find objective info these days; everyone wants to spoon feed you their own personal agenda You should hear the way liberal professors misrepresent the Right. As O’Reilly rightfully points out, college kids deserve to be given equal exposure to both sides of any given political debate. Conservatives may dominate the radio, but the opposite is true of academia.

Individuals form their opinions based on the information they have access to. So people who get their info from TV and radio tend to be more conservative; those who read books are more likely to lean to the left. When you only tell one side of a given story, you deprive citizens of their right to reach their own conclusions. It seems our left-wing academics and right-wing media are battling to see who can brainwash our youth the fastest. Neither reporting the news nor educating our youth should be a “capitalist” endeavor where the guy holding the microphone caters to market demands.

Does this mean that there will be more Fox News channels to balance NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, whatever else I missed and yes C-SPAN? Fox News is not really that conservative. They’re mostly moderate. Who else will report on the ACLU attacking a Christian monument and then welcome the Playmate of the month in the same hour?

So you all admit that Fox News has a bias? Now we’re getting somewhere! I haven’t heard a conservative admit that yet.

I agree on the fairness doctrine though. It’s insidious and stupid as well. I wouldn’t mind if the news outlets let their bias be known as they do in Britain where papers are known as liberal or conservative. At least then you don’t get these vieled attempts at “fairness” that we get nowadays.

This would also solve the “Crossfire” phenomena where news media will bring on anyone with an apposing viewpoint to argue a point, even if the argument is pretty much settled in teh public eye. This leads to right or left wing nutjobs with almost no following getting free airtime for stupid, fringe views, simply so the station can say they were being “fair” on the issue. This is what has ruined the current media more than bias one way or the other ever will. There are no more Walter Kronkites who are willing to make the hard decisions and speak out when they feel the facts justify a stance on an issue (i.e.-media going agaist the vietnam war towards the end when the facts began to point to an escalating war with no probable victory)

I’m not sure I’d say that Fox has a conservative bias as much as it simply appeals to a more conservative audience. When you’ve been watching CNN and all the other liberal TV networks so long, it’s hard to figure out whether Fox really IS fair and balanced or if it’s just the conservative side of the story.

Conservatives like Fox News because it’s not the constant Bush-bashing, pro-liberal trash that other networks are spewing out 24/7. I mean, would it be all that bad to have some good news on Iraq reported for a change? Fox does a lot more of that than CNN or any major network.

So in reality, I’m not sure that it’s Fox being conservative as much as it is other networks being so liberal. Nonetheless, if I had to choose, I’d go with Fox News as the lesser of the media evils.

I would put MSNBC on the liberal side. I’d put CNN on the non-sensical side as they seen to be rapidly becoming a tabloid rather than a news outlet (I disagree with them so often as a liberal I can’t see them having a liberal bias, but overall their reporting just plain sucks). I’d put the Christian Science Monitor and NPR in the center, with NPR having a distinct liberal bias on their talkshows but a very even keel in their hard news (who needs Liberal Talk Radio on AM when FM has NPR). I haven’t watched CBS, NBC, or ABC for so long I don’t even have an opinion.

From what I’ve watched of FoxNews I’d say it is decidedly conservative. My example would be Hannity and Colmes. They are basically a Crossfire clone in which the conservative is a stud and the liberal is a dud. Colmes is the weakest liberal I know argumentatively, he’s almost the embodiment of a straw man argument he’s so weak. One good point and he’s blown out of the water. Their hard news isn’t as bad but has a definite bias.

I’d have to agree on H&C and even Bill O’Reilly. But really, I think we need shows like that to counteract the left-wing lunatics like Keith Olbermann. But then again, Scarborough and Glenn Beck are pretty good from what I’ve seen as well.

I think what’s happening is that Fox News is becoming quite successful because people are so sick of the left-wing manipulation of the media. And organizations like MoveOn.org, the DailyKos and others simply can’t stand it. I’ve even heard reports that Fox News infuriated the Clinton clan.

As immature and ridiculous as it may sound, sometimes I like to get my news from the Colbert Report or even the Daily Show. At least they are up front about being satirical, jaded, and crazy. Not to mention the fact that they’re just plain funny (Colbert much more so than Jon Stewart).

Jens, I’m surprised you haven’t heard more conservatives confess that FoxNews is a shoddy network of fake journalists. No fair minded Republican can REALLY believe the whole “Fair and Balanced” facade, can they, Braden?

I think when people call CNN “left-wing” it is simply a sign that they’ve overwatched Fox and thus have started buying into Fox’s ploy of shifting the entire political spectrum to the right. For such individuals, Bill O’Reilly is considered a centrist (because he calls out nut-jobs like Ann Coulter & Michael Savage) and Alan Colmes suddenly becomes seen as a radical Lefty.